Why ? What has Afridi's ball biting and other cheating incidents in the past have got to do with how he has performed/led/behaved in this world cup ?

Because you mentioned Australian cricketers, as if Benchy wouldn't criticise them. You basically called him one-eyed because he was Australian. That is not on. Had someone done that to me with Indian players I'd have been absolutely pissed off.

Originally Posted by Sanz

You mean someone who consumes alcohol regularly ?

Mate, a bottler is someone who doesn't perform under pressure. They 'bottle' it.

Originally Posted by Sanz

That is a ridiculous suggestion. And I don't know what has his personal habit of drinking got to do with this topic.

And again, this is you just going off for no reason. You didn't understand the joke, yet got all aggressive.

"I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."

Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.

Using fingernails, teeth etc to scuff up one side - don't have a problem with it.

I've never understood why shining the ball is permitted in the rules as you're trying to maintain the original condition of the ball, yet raising the seam once it goes flat will see you hauled up on a charge of ball tampering.

​63*

Originally Posted by Howe_zat

Come on Lancashire!

Originally Posted by Jono

Let it be known for the record that the font in the top of the picture noted that Kohli was wearing Jimmy Choo shoes and Happy Socks

Using fingernails, teeth etc to scuff up one side - don't have a problem with it.

I've never understood why shining the ball is permitted in the rules as you're trying to maintain the original condition of the ball, yet raising the seam once it goes flat will see you hauled up on a charge of ball tampering.

Tend to agree with you, but it's easy to foresee good bowling being discredited just because of the conditions of the ball if it was allowed

Is this CricketWeb's greatest poster in the short history of the forum?

Posts

37,158

Simple response to this issue (without trying to derail) - Although the fielding side gets to choose which ball they wish to bowl with, ultimately the ball belongs to both teams, and the batting team should have some benefit from seeing off a new ball (flattening the seam/taking the shine off), as much as the bowling side gains an advantage from shining one side.

Simple response to this issue (without trying to derail) - Although the fielding side gets to choose which ball they wish to bowl with, ultimately the ball belongs to both teams, and the batting team should have some benefit from seeing off a new ball (flattening the seam/taking the shine off), as much as the bowling side gains an advantage from shining one side.

If they really want to be fair to both sides, then they should get rid of the stupid mandatory ball change rule after the 34th over. The batsmen won't have to face a relatively new ball and the bowlers can get reverse swing.

Is this CricketWeb's greatest poster in the short history of the forum?

Posts

37,158

Originally Posted by Agent Nationaux

If they really want to be fair to both sides, then they should get rid of the stupid mandatory ball change rule after the 34th over. The batsmen won't have to face a relatively new ball and the bowlers can get reverse swing.

I was talking about test cricket tbf, and as marc says, the ball they replace it with is supposed to have the same wear, just been cleaned up so it's whiter.

Simple response to this issue (without trying to derail) - Although the fielding side gets to choose which ball they wish to bowl with, ultimately the ball belongs to both teams, and the batting team should have some benefit from seeing off a new ball (flattening the seam/taking the shine off), as much as the bowling side gains an advantage from shining one side.

To be fair, batsmen have quite a few things in their favour at the moment.

"I will go down as Darren Sammy, the one who always smiles" - Darren Sammy